Kent Conrad budget a study in congressional gridlock

Sen. Kent Conrad reclaimed the Budget Committee gavel in 2007, setting out to tame the federal debt and turn staggering deficits into a surplus in five years.

But as the North Dakota Democrat rolls out the final budget of his career on Wednesday, it’s clear none of those goals has been realized. And the frustration and futility that’s marked his tenure as chairman may serve as a metaphor for what has broken and politically polarized Congress.

Text Size

-

+

reset

The Democratic-led Senate hasn’t passed a budget blueprint since April 2009, and it won’t do so again this spring as election-year pressures consume Capitol Hill. In fact, Conrad’s budget “markup” Wednesday won’t even be a real markup because senators won’t actually offer amendments or vote.

The 10-year budget plan Conrad unveiled Tuesday is based on the so-called Bowles-Simpson deficit-reduction plan, though the chairman conceded it’s “just reality” that any real deficit work by his committee will likely be put off until after November.

In an interview with POLITICO, Conrad said he’s tried to fight through all the congressional gridlock and inaction: “I don’t spend much time being frustrated because I don’t think it does any good. I just keep plugging away to try to get done what I think is so important for the country.”

It hasn’t been for lack of effort. Conrad, who will retire at the end of this term after a quarter of a century in the Senate, has been one of Democrats’ top deficit hawks, often armed with charts and eloquent speeches as he warns colleagues about the nation’s fiscal crisis from the chamber floor.

One budget expert described him as a modern-day Paul Revere.

“He’s always been sounding the alarm,” said Robert Bixby, executive director of The Concord Coalition, a nonpartisan group that educates the public about the dangers of federal deficits.

But few seem to be listening to Conrad’s warnings.

The ideological divide in Congress has stymied his centrist instincts: Republicans refuse to put tax hikes on the table, and Conrad’s fellow Democrats decry any changes to entitlements, like Medicare and Social Security.

“We have an acutely polarized political system at the moment, … and it’s prevented centrists like Conrad and [former Sen.] Judd Gregg and [Sen.] Olympia Snowe — it’s a long list — from being effective,” said Alice Rivlin, who was the founding director of the Congressional Budget Office and director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Bill Clinton.

Conrad also has been torn between fealty to his party and his responsibility as budget chairman to pass an annual spending blueprint out of his committee — something required by law.

Readers' Comments (21)

Budgets can pass The Senate legally with a simple majority. Sen. Conrad knows this and you should know this Scott if you really are a journalist.

This means that The Senate can pass a budget if they wanted to. Now any journalist with half a brain should be able to conclude that The Senate is not working on a budget only because they do not want to.

The Democrat leadership refuses to allow a vote on a budget as even their own party wont vote for all the spending when its written down and added up. The only way Reid can keep from having programs cut is to keep a vote from occurring.

The Demonrats just want to tax us poor innocent RICH people. That is why their plans never work out.

Things will be different now with Mitt in charge. We can roll back 60 years of socialism that started with Rooseveldt, and get back to the nation our forefathers (who were all RICH) wanted us to have - a place where wealth and property were respected and RICH men run things.

Mitt will cement the conservative dominance of the Supreme Court for the next twenty years. We will get rid of Immoral SOCIALIST law like Roe V. Wade, minimum wage, OSHA, medicare and Socialst Security.

Employers will no longer be forced to pay for their employees immorality, and women like Ann Romney who stay home and raise children will return to their highest position of admiration, and all women will aspire to be like Ann!

We rich people don't like our hard earned investments to be taxed, it makes us unhappy, and when we are unhappy, we don't create jobs. Mitt will make us happy by cutting our taxes almost to 0 under the Ryan plan, and then we will create a few jobs for honest, MORAL hard working poor people. Mitt will make them pay most of the taxes, but that is as it should be - it will teach them to work harder and get rich so they can keep their money!

The lazy ones can go to SOCIALIST CANADA where they belong! Things will be Marvelous Again!

Of course Mitt never said women should work to have dignity - that was doctored video!

"Conrad also has been torn between fealty [Webster's: the fidelity of a vassal or feudal tenant to his lord] to his party and his responsibility as budget chairman to pass an annual spending blueprint out of his committee — something required by law."

What to do? What to do? Choose fealty to the party or obey the law? Clearly, Conrad has chosen party over doing his job as budget chairman and doing what is required by law. But note how how he justifies his inaction: it's "just reality" that work on the deficit "will likely be put off until after November." Why? Isn't he the Chairman of the Budget Committee. Politicians are skilled at deflecting responsibility for their actions, or in this case inaction, by acting as if some unseen force is at work that ties their hands and is beyond their control.

Please look past the emotions that this article will inevitably evoke and look deeper to see how the political process fulfulls one purpose: to facilitate the self-serving interests of career politicians. We have been duped into thinking and believing that our politics is normal and even somehow valuable. We have been fed a big lie. And until we realize that, "If we keep doing what we've done, we'll keep getting what we've got."

President Obama is doing all he can to divert attention from the fact that the federal debt will have risen by $6 trillion during his term. He does not want people to think about how his administration projects that the federal debt will rise to $20 trillion by 2016. He has ignored his own budget commission and proposes nothing to address the federal government's $50 trillion+ in unfunded Medicare and Social Security unfunded liabilities. He is showing the rankest kind of demagogic populism by railing about mostly imaginary issues such as gasoline price speculation, and the "Buffet rule," which would have a relatively tiny effect on paying for the federal government's spending. Romney shows every appearance of being more concerned about seriously addressing the federal government's grave fiscal problems. Obama needs to have a career change and do something that he is better suited for, like reading from his telepromter as an ex-president on the rubber chicken circuit.

I am starting to believe getting Harry Reid out of his role is more important than getting Obama out of his. He is the real obstructionist.

I've always thought the government works best when congress is one party and the WH the other - because it requires a meeting of the minds and good centrist ideas to come out. But I think Obama's policies and rhethoric is destroying our company andt keeping Reid in power is not a good thing either. Right now I don't know which I would like to see go more.

Kent Conrad will leave the senate with a record of ineptness. The senator cannot even pass the President's proposed budget through a democratically controlled senate. Is there any reason why he does not take up the President's budget proposal and just pass it? Could it be tat the preident's proposed budget does not comply with te budget reconciliation act?

Politico, you are pathetic. Instead of beating on Conrad or decrying "gridlock" (which is our friend, by the way), why don't you go talk to the people that ARE the problem? You know, Harry Reid and Chuck U. Schumer? Because in the Senate, I'm pretty sure that Prince Harry controls the agenda. Since you appear to be incapable of doing your jobs, let me help: You could ask him, "Mr. Majority Leader, federal law requires that you pass a budget resolution to allow reconciliation with any budget resolution arising from the House. Why, Sir, will you not follow and obey federal law?". Get it on camera, please. And don't let up until he gives a cogent answer.

Conrad has seen the iceberg and is sounding the alarm safe in the lifeboat of retirement.

An astute analysis on Conrad.

Further, there will be no vote on this or any other budget in the Senate until after the election. Some of us are so over the political machinations that consistently reinforce that there is little interest in governance even in a time of crisis. Obama can cite the GOP as "obstructionist" all day long, but most of us know it's just one more hypocritical soundbyte among many.

Budgets can pass The Senate legally with a simple majority. Sen. Conrad knows this and you should know this Scott if you really are a journalist.

This means that The Senate can pass a budget if they wanted to. Now any journalist with half a brain should be able to conclude that The Senate is not working on a budget only because they do not want to.

Not one time in this article do you state this simple fact.

Shameful.

Yep the senate Democrats can pass a budget with 51 votes, don't even need any Republicans to vote for it. Of course Politico and the liberal media usually leave that fact out.

Bret Baier beat on Carney for this exact reason:

www.google.com/url

"Baier led off the interview by asking Carney about Ryan’s response to the president’s remarks about his budget. Carney said he’d ask Ryan to “respond with the same specificity, the same reliance on math and facts as the president presented in his speech today.” The Ryan plan, he said, says, “we’re going to give massive tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and somehow pay for them with unspecified closing of loopholes.” It’s “not responsible” budget presentation, he concluded. Carney continued, saying Ryan’s budget represents “a situation of the Republican party where what used to be the center of the party has disappeared and realigned itself with what is a very conservative vision that’s outside of the American mainstream.”

“You say ‘responsible budget presentation,’” Baier said, pointed out that Democrats put forward a budget that failed in the House with a 414-0 vote. “Senate Democrats have not passed a budget resolution in 1,070 days,” he said. “Why?”

“Come on, Bret,” Carney said, “you cite — and I know that you often do — the statistics that represent gimmickry and stunts.” Baier interrupted, asking, “What’s gimmickry about not passing a budget in the Senate?” Carney said, “It is our preference that Congress work and the Senate effectively pass a budget.”

“So why doesn’t the president call Harry Reid and say, why don’t we get a budget on the table and vote on it?” Baier asked. Carney replied: “Bret, I know that’s what you want to make this segment about.” He then reverted to the talking point about the president’s balanced approach before Baier stepped in and said, “The question is about Senate Democratic leadership, Jay. Harry Reid controls the Senate.” Visibly frustrated, Carney asked, “Bret, am I answering the questions?”

Nonetheless, Baier continued: “Why doesn’t he put something close to the president’s budget on the table in the Senate and pass it? 51 votes, he has the votes.” Carney responded by pointing out Republicans’ refusal to engage in bipartisan negotiation, and Baier pointed out again, “Democrats could vote on a budget and pass it.”

“I know that’s what you want to make this about,” Carney reiterated. “You know the only way in modern-day Washington to achieve a significant budget compromise is when both parties are willing to work together.”

"Hanging over the discussion is Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, who had steadfastly said he would not bring a budget to the floor this year — and who, Republicans said, pressured Mr. Conrad into complying."

Harry Reid has put out notice he will NOT bring a budget to the floor this year. Yet, you will hear so many scream about the Republicans are holding up funding. No different than the last two years, but that's ok with some people I guess.

The Demonrats just want to tax us poor innocent RICH people. That is why their plans never work out.

Things will be different now with Mitt in charge. We can roll back 60 years of socialism that started with Rooseveldt, and get back to the nation our forefathers (who were all RICH) wanted us to have - a place where wealth and property were respected and RICH men run things.

Mitt will cement the conservative dominance of the Supreme Court for the next twenty years. We will get rid of Immoral SOCIALIST law like Roe V. Wade, minimum wage, OSHA, medicare and Socialst Security.

Employers will no longer be forced to pay for their employees immorality, and women like Ann Romney who stay home and raise children will return to their highest position of admiration, and all women will aspire to be like Ann!

We rich people don't like our hard earned investments to be taxed, it makes us unhappy, and when we are unhappy, we don't create jobs. Mitt will make us happy by cutting our taxes almost to 0 under the Ryan plan, and then we will create a few jobs for honest, MORAL hard working poor people. Mitt will make them pay most of the taxes, but that is as it should be - it will teach them to work harder and get rich so they can keep their money!

The lazy ones can go to SOCIALIST CANADA where they belong! Things will be Marvelous Again!

Of course Mitt never said women should work to have dignity - that was doctored vide

And here we see the problem in all it's partisan glory...

The article is about the BUDGET.. Just where in your left wing noise machine rant do you address the lack of a budget from the Senate? Ohhh, taking a page from obamie, when in doubt, PUNT and change the subject (I should add in the lying also, please post direct quotes to backup the statements you made).

The announcement today by Conrad that the Democrats will not attempt to pass a budget until after the election should infuriate every American that pays taxes. Of course if they did pass one, they wouldn't be able to spend the trillions that they have the last 3 years. I'm not a huge fan of Republicans, but every Democrat should be voted out on this issue alone.

Senator Conrad is a terrible disappointment. For years he pushed diligently for solutions to the growing debt problems. Now the debt crisis is far more threatening and he just curls up in the corner. Either Harry Reid has something terrible to hold over him or Conrad has no character at all. He isn't even running and he still can't show some self-respect.

Senator Conrad is a terrible disappointment. For years he pushed diligently for solutions to the growing debt problems. Now the debt crisis is far more threatening and he just curls up in the corner. Either Harry Reid has something terrible to hold over him or Conrad has no character at all. He isn't even running and he still can't show some self-respect.